Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11
to speak to republicans last night at the reception here about the fiscal cliff? >> i won't read out conversations. the president and first lady met with scores and scores of lawmakers last night as is the norm in a situation like this, but i'm not going to read out individual conversations. >> [inaudible] >> i've seen a report that speaker boehner was not part of the receiving line, but the president has conversations with speaker boehner with some regularity and looks forward to speaking with him again. >> last question then. both sides have given their proposal. you said what you need to see from the republican side. what, in terms of process now, is the next step? >> well, conversations continue between our team and lawmakers and their teams. the president will have conversations as well. i don't have any to preview to you or read out to you, and the conversations will encompass not just leaders of congress, but business leaders and civic leaders and governors and others who have a stake in the process and the outcome of the negotiations, but as secretary geithner said over the w
portion of the upcoming so-called fiscal cliff. so why isn't it already in law? why aren't middle-class families already able to feel confident in their taxes not going up? well, for one reason and one reason alone -- house republicans continue to hold the middle class hostage in a desperate and deeply misguided attempt to buck the will of the people, ignore the results of this election, and protect the wealthiest americans from paying their fair share. that's really all there is to it. mr. president, if republicans truly cared about keeping taxes low for the middle class, they can do it right now. the senate passed a bill that would extend the tax cuts for 98% of families and 97% of workers. president obama said he'd sign it intaw law. into law. he even showed us the been. all the house has to do is let it come up for a vote, pass it and middle-class families can go into these holidays with the certainty they deserve. mr. president, i want to be very clear about something because some of my republican colleagues seem intent on confusing the issue. republicans don't have to suppor
with the fiscal cliff and dealing with our debt situation and not have a debt ceiling hanging out there as a diversionary but dangerous issue. but for some reason, inexplicable, the minority leader, the republican leader, changed his mind. now, he said on the floor well, important measures deserve 60 votes, but when he brought it up earlier, he acted as if he was in favor of it, he was offering it. and now, of course, essaying no, he's going to object to his own resolution. i wish he would reconsider. again, playing -- using the debt ceiling as leverage, using the debt ceiling as a threat, using the debt ceiling as a way to achieve a different agenda is dangerous. it's playing with fire. and yet, with the opportunity to take that off the table, reassure the markets, the minority leader blinked. i don't know why. it's hard to figure out the strategy that he's employing, but we would hope on this side of the aisle -- and i think i speak for all of us -- that he would reconsider and perhaps early next week let us vote on his own resolution. i yield the floor. mr. schumer: i notice th
't as romantic? >> they wanted to know if it was a vampire. that's a different movie. >> the fiscal cliff. yesterday abc wrote republican doomsday snow. doomsday scenario was that you vote for the senate bill extended bush tax cuts 4908% of the people. say that's it, no more. "the new york times" today, it's a fallback position. specters well i don't want to -- apocalyptics have because i am confident there's enough people, a majority of people in this town to extend what we're doing here, with playing chicken with is the most important country in the world. we are on the verge of doing some significant things. to this enormous an extraordinary country. i don't think anyone wants to be part of the republic. that being said, before we talk about fiscal cliff, we'll get because the last fiscal cliff. we had another fiscal cliff types of new with the debt limit to create a center that led to this ridiculous idea that i voted against that let's put a bunch of bad things to happen at one time because that will force washington to do something. surprise, it didn't work. here we are again. so we
, probably not that many. let that pass. that addresses the fiscal cliff and says to the american people we can take action on things we agree on. it's good for everybody, the economy, fiscal cliff and it would set a tone here in washington that we can get something done when we work together cooperatively. so we've been explicit, specific. we look forward to specificity from republicans. >> there are now countdown clocks -- [inaudible] those of us who have been lucky enough to study the legislative body we have an idea of how things go. there's more and more lawmakers who look at it and say it's december 15th. if you have an agreement and have the time necessary for it to be read, digest it, debated before christmas. the president shares that timeline. it's not december 1st. it's something of a practical matter much earlier than that. is that is that in any way create a sense of urgency? >> the sooner the better that we receive specificity from republicans about what it is they would do on revenues, for example, what it is they want on spending cuts, for example. we will be able to move fo
the country goes over the fiscal cliff goes by, more and more republicans have joined our chorus. they recognize that the willing misto compromise sooner has put them in a real bind. so reasonable republicans are asking the house leadership to allow a vote on the senate-passed legislation. what was once a trickle has become more of a flood. last week republican representative tom cole said it was time to give middle-class families certainty their taxes won't go up by $2,200 on average on january 1. then tim scott from north carolina ad admitted that the senate-passed tax cut will surely pass the house since it will take only 26 republican ren votes for passage. i don't most of the time agree with david brooks but no one can dispute this columnist for "the new york times" is brilliant in writing. he's a great, great journalist and explains things so well. i really have great admiration for him. he wrote yesterday, "republicans have to realize they are going to have to cave in on tax rates." that's the way it is, mr. president. "they're going to have to cave on tax rates." then on
but the republicans will finally realizing their way back from the fiscal cliff has been right in front of them all along. in july the senate passed legislation to give economic certainty to 98% of american families and to small businesses, to every american making less than $250,000 a year. for four months we've been one vote away for from a solution to this looming crisis. they've held the middle-class hostage to protect the richest 2% of taxpayers, people who enjoyed a decade of ballooning income and shrinking tax bills. one has to admire the president, who went out and campaigned on this issue. he didn't -- he didn't in any way walk away from the issue. he said that's how we're going to get our fiscal house in order. and independents by a huge margin, democrats by a huge margin, and 41e% of republicans support what the president asked us to do. now, reasonable republicans are coming around to what democrats are said all along. let's reasure millions of americans that their taxes won't go up on january 1. those are the people who are the middle class of america. prominent republicans are calling
about the alternative minimum tax as part of the overall fiscal cliff negotiations. as mr. buckley just said, this impacts your 2012 taxes. if your comments or questions about this, tylenol. republican 202-88-5381. democrats to a 25852880. independents and others call in at 225-85-3882. does the amt dates back before the 80s? >> guest: it does date back to the early 1960s. with a tax reform proposal from kennedy. there's been a variety of tax. the current one is basically this version. >> host: this is the "washington post" graphic on the alternative minimum tax. right now the amt has around 5 million upper-middle-class families with many children or other deductible expenses and live in high-cost states. for the 2012 year, the amt is on track to effect an additional 26.4 million people reaching deep into the middle class because congress had not adjusted to tax. why is high-cost states a factor in this? >> guest: you have to have current income within the 20,500,000-dollar range because it's in high exemption. and also, they call it a blue state problem or place to upper income people
to be operating. as the fiscal cliff approaches, we should be work together across the aisle to address issues like we are today with the defense authorization bill but also other critical issues, including tax issues and spending issues and that's what i wanted to address today. we -- we have a lot of challenges and instead of pulling together, we seem to be pulling apart. and i'm specifically referring to some of the suggestions by some in the majority that we consider controversial and partisan rule changes that would marginalize minority members and doing it in a way that breaks the current rules to change the rules. and what i mean by that is, it takes 67 votes to change a rule here in the united states sena senate. that's a rule, by the way, that dates back to 1917. and the reason that's in place is because obviously, you know, folks wanted to force the majority and the minority to work together to make those rule changes. you don't get a two-thirds vote without that. and i think that's important, that the basic rules are ones that are agreed on. we tend to change parties a lot around he
to avert that fiscal cliff that we hear so much about. yesterday, after weeks of delay, and as the days dwindle and taxes are set to go up for millions of families and businesses, republicans in the house finally showed up at the negotiating table. and now we know why they've been holding their cards so close it their vest. their proposal would raise taxes on millions of middle-class families. their plan to raise $800 billion in revenue by eliminating popular tax deductions and credits would reach deep into pockets of middle-class families. republicans are so intent on protecting low tax rates for millionaires and billionaires, they're willing to sacrifice middle-class families' economic security to do so. at the first of the year, middle-class families, will get an average of $200 i,200 in additional taxes they'll have to pay. their proposal was short on specifics but we do know from independent analysis that it is impossible to raise enough revenue and make a dent in our deficit without using one of two things -- raising tax rates on the top 2% or raising taxes on the middle class. an
to give him. if the president wants to avoid going over the fiscal cliff, he can steer us away from it. special interests and his liberal base will no doubt cry foul, but they will follow him if he will lead. and i don't see the leadership, between you and me. not to put too fine a point on it, but if we go over the cliff, it will be because the president wanted it to happen, and he thinks he'll get political points for doing it. the mainstream media, it's likely they will ignore the actual facts here. even though the president will never again run for any public office, he will have put cheap political points ahead of a reasonable deal that he claims to support. now, this is deeply sin wel deed the president should understand that he will be portrayed not as a strong leader but as one who wilted, caving to special interests over the well-being of the country. when he faced the choice of tough statesmanship or easy accolades from the network and a dead-ender barricks he chosdeade latter. i am i think it's time for the president to talk to us rather than talkin talking from a toy y tryi
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11